To stay in kind with the ?, you could use ! At least it would be read
correctly by latin-writers, if misunderstood.
On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 5:37 PM, Garth Wallace <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 4:03 AM, Paul Bennett <[log in to unmask]>
> wrote:
> > As stated in the text, yes/no questions in Hamer are identical in lexemes
> > and word order to affirmative statements, with a rising pitch on the word
> > being asked about. WH-questions seem to take a WH-word, and have the
> rising
> > pitch on the (sentence-final) verb.
> >
> > It makes sense to me to mark the rising pitch in yes/no questions by
> placing
> > the question mark immediately after the word being asked about, and for
> > WH-questions, to place it at the end of the sentence.
> >
> > Also as stated in the text, negative statements are identical in lexemes
> and
> > word order to affirmative statements, with a falling pitch on the word
> being
> > denied.
> >
> > I think, for isomorphy and clarity, I need to invent a "negation" sign
> to be
> > placed after negative words.
> >
> > I'm thinking right now of one of ¿, ‽, or ¬, representing "unquestion",
> > "struck-out question", or "the symbol used in math". If I go with the
> last,
> > I may place it before rather than after the negative word, but I think
> that
> > breaks isomorphy and thereby the principle of least surprise.
> >
> > Any suggestions?
>
> I'd go with ¬. The turned question mark is usually interpreted as
> marking the beginning of a question. The interrobang is supposed to be
> a combination question mark and exclamation point, is very similar to
> the question mark (especially at smaller font sizes), and is not found
> in all fonts.
>